Monday, December 2, 2013

Today in Judaism – Today is: Monday, 29 Kislev 5774 · 2 December 2013 - Chanukah 5

Today in Judaism – Today is: Monday, 29 Kislev 5774 · 2 December 2013 - Chanukah 5
-------
Today’s Laws and Customs:
• Kindle Six Chanukah Lights tonight
In commemoration of the miracle of Chanukah (see "Today in Jewish History" for Kislev 25) we kindle the Chanukah lights -- oil lamps or candles -- each evening of the eight-day festival, increasing the number of lights each evening. Tonight we kindle six lights. (In the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall; this evening, then, commences the 6th day of Chanukah).
The icon below displays the ideal Chanukah lighting time for your location; the lighting can be done, however, later in the evening as well. For more on Chanukah lighting times, click here. (If no time is displayed, click on icon to set your location.)
For a more detailed guide to Chanukah lighting click here. For text and audio of the blessings recited before lighting, click here.
Additional Chanukah observances and customs are listed below:
• Hallel & Al HaNissim
Special prayers of thanksgiving -- Hallel (in its full version) and Al HaNissim -- are added to the daily prayers and Grace After Meals on all eight days of Chanukah. Tachnun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted for the duration of trhe festival.
• Latkes, Sufganiot & Dairy Foods
On Chanukah we eat foods fried in oil -- such as latkes (potato cakes) and sufganiot (doughnuts) -- in commemoration of the miracle of the oil.
It is also customary to eat dairy foods in commemoration of Judith's heroic deed.
• Dreidel
It is customary to play dreidel -- a game played with a spinning top inscribed with the Hebrew letters Nun, Gimmel, Hei and Shin, which spell the phrase Nes Gadol Hayah Sham, "a great miracle happened there." (It is said that when the Greeks forbade the study of Torah, Jewish children continued the study with their teachers in caves and cellars; when the agents of the king were seen approaching, the children would hide their scrolls and start to play with spinning tops...)
Links: About the dreidel
• Chanukah Gelt
It is an age-old custom to distribute gifts of Chanukah gelt ("Chanukah money") to children on Chanukah. (It was the custom of the rebbes of Chabad-Lubavitch to give Chanukah gelt to their children and other family members on the fourth or fifth night of Chanukah; more recently, however, the Lubavitcher Rebbe encouraged the giving of Chanukah gelt every day of the festival -- except for Shabbat, when handling money is forbidden.)
Today in Jewish History:
• 5th Day of Chanukah Miracle (139 BCE)
On the 25th of Kislev in the year 3622 from creation, the Maccabees liberated the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, after defeating the vastly more numerous and powerful armies of the Syrian-Greek king Antiochus IV, who had tried to forcefully uproot the beliefs and practices of Judaism from the people of Israel. The victorious Jews repaired, cleansed and rededicated the Temple to the service of G-d. But all the Temple's oil had been defiled by the pagan invaders; when the Jews sought to light the Temple's menorah (candelabra), they found only one small cruse of ritually pure olive oil. Miraculously, the one-day supply burned for eight days, until new, pure oil could be obtained. In commemoration, the Sages instituted the 8-day festival of Chanukah, on which lights are kindled nightly to recall and publicize the miracle.
Link: The Story of Chanukah
Daily Quote:
"Yom Kippur" also means "a day like Purim"(Rabbi Isaac Luria ("The Holy Ari", 1534-1572))
Daily Study - Chitas and Rambam for today: Parshat Vayigash, 2nd Portion (Genesis 44:31-45:7)
Chapter 44
31. it will come to pass, when he sees that the boy is gone, he will die, and your servants will have brought down the hoary head of your servant, our father, in grief to the grave.    לא. וְהָיָה כִּרְאוֹתוֹ כִּי אֵין הַנַּעַר וָמֵת וְהוֹרִידוּ עֲבָדֶיךָ אֶת שֵׂיבַת עַבְדְּךָ אָבִינוּ בְּיָגוֹן שְׁאֹלָה:
it will come to pass, when he sees that the boy is not here, he will die: His father will die because of his calamity [of the loss of his son].
והיה כראותו כי אין הנער ומת: אביו מצרתו:
32. For your servant assumed responsibility for the boy from my father, saying, 'If I do not bring him to you, I will have sinned against my father forever.'       לב. כִּי עַבְדְּךָ עָרַב אֶת הַנַּעַר מֵעִם אָבִי לֵאמֹר אִם לֹא אֲבִיאֶנּוּ אֵלֶיךָ וְחָטָאתִי לְאָבִי כָּל הַיָּמִים:
For your servant assumed responsibility for the boy: Now if you ask why I enter the fray more than my other brothers, [I will reply that] they are all [standing] from the outside [without commitment], while I have bound myself with a strong bond to be an outcast in both worlds. [From Gen. Rabbah 93:8]
כי עבדך ערב את הנער: ואם תאמר למה אני נכנס לתגר יותר משאר אחי, הם כולם מבחוץ, אבל אני נתקשרתי בקשר חזק להיות מנודה בשני עולמות:
33. So now, please let your servant stay instead of the boy as a slave to my lord, and may the boy go up with his brothers.       לג. וְעַתָּה יֵשֶׁב נָא עַבְדְּךָ תַּחַת הַנַּעַר עֶבֶד לַאדֹנִי וְהַנַּעַר יַעַל עִם אֶחָיו:
please let your servant stay: I am superior to him in all respects: in strength, in battle, and in service. [From Gen. Rabbah 93:8]
ישב נא עבדך וגו': לכל דבר אני מעולה ממנו, לגבורה, ולמלחמה, ולשמש:
34. For how will I go up to my father if the boy is not with me? Let me not see the misery that will befall my father!"     לד. כִּי אֵיךְ אֶעֱלֶה אֶל אָבִי וְהַנַּעַר אֵינֶנּוּ אִתִּי פֶּן אֶרְאֶה בָרָע אֲשֶׁר יִמְצָא אֶת אָבִי:
Chapter 45
1. Now Joseph could not bear all those standing beside him, and he called out, "Take everyone away from me!" So no one stood with him when Joseph made himself known to his brothers.    א. וְלֹא יָכֹל יוֹסֵף לְהִתְאַפֵּק לְכֹל הַנִּצָּבִים עָלָיו וַיִּקְרָא הוֹצִיאוּ כָל אִישׁ מֵעָלָי וְלֹא עָמַד אִישׁ אִתּוֹ בְּהִתְוַדַּע יוֹסֵף אֶל אֶחָיו:
Now Joseph could not bear all those standing: He could not bear that Egyptians would stand beside him and hear his brothers being embarrassed when he would make himself known to them. [From Tanchuma Vayigash 5]
ולא יכול יוסף להתאפק לכל הנצבים: לא היה יכול לסבול שיהיו מצרים נצבים עליו ושומעין שאחיו מתביישין בהודעו להם:
2. And he wept out loud, so the Egyptians heard, and the house of Pharaoh heard.      ב. וַיִּתֵּן אֶת קֹלוֹ בִּבְכִי וַיִּשְׁמְעוּ מִצְרַיִם וַיִּשְׁמַע בֵּית פַּרְעֹה:
and the house of Pharaoh heard: Heb. פַּרְעֹה בֵּית, the house of Pharaoh, namely his servants and the members of his household. This does not literally mean a house, but it is like “the house of Israel” (Ps. 115:12), “the house of Judah” (I Kings 12:21), mesnede in Old French, household. [From Targum Onkelos]
וישמע בית פרעה: ביתו של פרעה, כלומר עבדיו ובני ביתו. ואין זה לשון בית ממש אלא כמו (תהלים קטו יב) בית ישראל, (מלכים א' יב כא) בית יהודה מיישניד"א בלע"ז [בני הבית]:
3. And Joseph said to his brothers, "I am Joseph. Is my father still alive?" but his brothers could not answer him because they were startled by his presence.    ג. וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹסֵף אֶל אֶחָיו אֲנִי יוֹסֵף הַעוֹד אָבִי חָי וְלֹא יָכְלוּ אֶחָיו לַעֲנוֹת אֹתוֹ כִּי נִבְהֲלוּ מִפָּנָיו:
they were startled by his presence: Because of embarrassment. [From Tanchuma Vayigash 5]
נבהלו מפניו: מפני הבושה:
4. Then Joseph said to his brothers, "Please come closer to me," and they drew closer. And he said, "I am your brother Joseph, whom you sold into Egypt.    ד. וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹסֵף אֶל אֶחָיו גְּשׁוּ נָא אֵלַי וַיִּגָּשׁוּ וַיֹּאמֶר אֲנִי יוֹסֵף אֲחִיכֶם אֲשֶׁר מְכַרְתֶּם אֹתִי מִצְרָיְמָה:
Please come closer: He saw them drawing backwards. He said,“Now my brothers are embarrassed” (Tanchuma Vayigash 5). He called them tenderly and pleadingly and showed them that he was circumcised (Gen. Rabbah 93:10).
גשו נא אלי: ראה אותם נסוגים לאחוריהם, אמר עכשיו אחי נכלמים, קרא להם בלשון רכה ותחנונים, והראה להם שהוא מהול:
5. But now do not be sad, and let it not trouble you that you sold me here, for it was to preserve life that God sent me before you.     ה. וְעַתָּה | אַל תֵּעָצְבוּ וְאַל יִחַר בְּעֵינֵיכֶם כִּי מְכַרְתֶּם אֹתִי הֵנָּה כִּי לְמִחְיָה שְׁלָחַנִי אֱלֹהִים לִפְנֵיכֶם:
to preserve life: Heb. לְמִחְיָה, to be to you a preserver of life. [From Targum Jonathan]
למחיה: להיות לכם למחיה:
6. For already two years of famine [have passed] in the midst of the land, and [for] another five years, there will be neither plowing nor harvest.    ו. כִּי זֶה שְׁנָתַיִם הָרָעָב בְּקֶרֶב הָאָרֶץ וְעוֹד חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים אֲשֶׁר אֵין חָרִישׁ וְקָצִיר:
For already two years of famine: have passed of the [total] years of the famine.
כי זה שנתים הרעב: עברו משני הרעב:
7. And God sent me before you to make for you a remnant in the land, and to preserve [it] for you for a great deliverance.       ז. וַיִּשְׁלָחֵנִי אֱלֹהִים לִפְנֵיכֶם לָשׂוּם לָכֶם שְׁאֵרִית בָּאָרֶץ וּלְהַחֲיוֹת לָכֶם לִפְלֵיטָה גְּדֹלָה:
---
Daily Tehillim – Psalms Chapters 140-144
Chapter 140
David composed this psalm against his slanderers, especially the chief conspirator Doeg. Anyone confronted by slanderers should recite this psalm.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. Rescue me from the evil man, protect me from the man of violence,
3. who devise evil schemes in their heart; every day they gather for wars.
4. They sharpen their tongues like a serpent; the spider's venom is forever under their lips.
5. Guard me, Lord, from the hands of the wicked, protect me from the man of violence-those who plot to cause my steps to slip.
6. Arrogant ones have hidden a snare for me, and ropes; they spread a net by my path, they set traps for me continually.
7. I said to the Lord, "You are my God!" Listen, O Lord, to the voice of my pleas.
8. God, my Lord, the strength of my deliverance, You sheltered my head on the day of armed battle.
9. Grant not, O Lord, the desires of the wicked; fulfill not his scheme, make it unattainable forever.
10. As for the head of my besiegers, let the deceit of their own lips bury them.
11. Let burning coals fall upon them; let it cast them down into the fire, into deep pits, never to rise again.
12. Let not the slanderous man be established in the land; let the evil of the man of violence trap him until he is overthrown.
13. I know that the Lord will execute judgement for the poor, justice for the needy.
14. Indeed, the righteous will extol Your Name; the upright will dwell in Your presence.
Chapter 141
This psalm teaches an important lesson: One should pray for Divine assistance that his mouth not speak that which is not in his heart. The gatekeeper only allows the gate to be opened for a purpose; let it be the same with one's lips.
1. A psalm by David. O Lord, I have called You, hasten to me; listen to my voice when I call to You.
2. Let my prayer be set forth as incense before You, the raising of my hands as an afternoon offering.
3. O Lord, place a guard for my mouth, keep watch over the door of my lips.
4. Do not incline my heart to a bad thing-to perform deeds in wickedness, with men, doers of evil; let me not partake of their delicacies.
5. Let the righteous one strike me with kindness and let him rebuke me; like the finest oil, let my head not refuse it. For as long [as I live], my prayer is [to preserve me] from their harm.
6. For their judges have slipped because of their [hearts of] rock, though they heard my words and they were pleasant.
7. As one who chops and splinters [wood] on the ground, so have our bones been scattered to the mouth of the grave.
8. For to You, God, my Lord, are my eyes; in You I take shelter; do not pour out my soul.
9. Protect me from the hands of the snare they laid for me, and from the traps of the evildoers.
10. Let the wicked fall into their own nets together, until I pass over.
Chapter 142
David composed this psalm while hiding from Saul in a cave, at which time he had cut off the corner of Saul's garment (to prove that he was able to kill him but did not wish to do so). He declared, "Where can I turn, and where can I run? All I have is to cry out to You!"
1. A maskil1 by David, when he was in the cave, a prayer.
2. With my voice I will cry out to the Lord; with my voice I will call to the Lord in supplication.
3. I will pour out my plea before Him; I will declare my distress in His presence.
4. When my spirit is faint within me, You know my path. In the way in which I walk, they have hidden a snare for me.
5. Look to my right and see, there is none that will know me; every escape is lost to me. No man cares for my soul.
6. I cried out to You, O Lord; I said, "You are my refuge, my portion in the land of the living.”
7. Listen to my song of prayer, for I have been brought very low. Deliver me from my pursuers, for they are too mighty for me.
8. Release my soul from confinement, so that it may acknowledge Your Name. Because of me, the righteous will crown [You] when You will deal graciously with me.
Chapter 143
1. A psalm by David. O Lord, hear my prayer, lend Your ear to my supplications. With Your faithfulness answer me, and with Your righteousness.
2. Do not enter into judgment with Your servant, for no living being would be vindicated before You.
3. For the enemy has pursued my soul; he has crushed my life to the ground; he has set me down in dark places, like those who are eternally dead.
4. Then my spirit became faint within me; my heart was dismayed within me.
5. I remembered the days of old; I meditated on all Your deeds; I spoke of Your handiwork.
6. I spread out my hands to You; like a languishing land my soul yearns after You, Selah.
7. Answer me soon, O Lord, my spirit is spent; hide not Your face from me, lest I become like those who descend into the pit.
8. Let me hear Your kindness in the morning, for have I trusted in You. Let me know the way in which I should walk, for to You I have lifted my soul.
9. Deliver me from my enemies, O Lord. I have concealed [my troubles from all, save] You.
10. Teach me to do Your will, for You are my God. Let Your good spirit lead me in an even path.
11. For the sake of Your Name, O Lord, give me life; in Your righteousness, take my soul out of distress.
12. And in Your kindness, cut off my enemies and obliterate all those who oppress my soul, for I am Your servant.
Chapter 144
After triumphing in all his wars, David composed this psalm in praise of God.
1. By David. Blessed be the Lord, my Rock, Who trains my hands for battle and my fingers for war.
2. My source of kindness and my fortress, my high tower and my rescuer, my shield, in Whom I take refuge; it is He Who makes my people submit to me.
3. O Lord, what is man that You have recognized him; the son of a mortal, that You are mindful of him?
4. Man is like a breath; his days are like a passing shadow.
5. O Lord, incline Your heavens and descend; touch the mountains and they will become vapor.
6. Flash one bolt of lightning and You will scatter them; send out Your arrows and You will confound them.
7. Stretch forth Your hands from on high, rescue me and deliver me out of many waters, from the hand of strangers,
8. whose mouth speaks deceit and whose right hand is a right hand of falsehood.
9. God, I will sing a new song to You, I will play to You upon a harp of ten strings.
10. He who gives victory to kings, He will rescue David, His servant, from the evil sword.
11. Rescue me and deliver me from the hand of strangers, whose mouth speaks deceit and whose right hand is a right hand of falsehood.
12. For our sons are like plants, brought up to manliness in their youth; our daughters are like cornerstones, fashioned after the fashion of a palace.
13. Our storehouses are full, overflowing with all manner of food; our sheep increase by the thousands, growing by the tens of thousands in our open fields.
14. Our leaders bear the heaviest burden; there is none who break through, nor is there bad report, nor outcry in our streets.
15. Happy is the nation for whom this is so. Happy is that nation whose God is the Lord.
---
Today's Tanya Lesson - Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 4
Monday, 29 Kislev 5774 / 2 December 2013
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 4
ועוד יש לכל נפש אלקית שלשה לבושים
In addition [to its ten faculties — discussed in ch. 3], every divine soul (nefesh elokit) possesses three garments.
The soul possesses three auxiliary powers, which are its instruments of expression. Like garments, they can be donned or shed at will. When the soul utilizes any of these three powers it is “clothed” in them; when it does not use them, it is “divested” of them. Also, just as garments give expression to their wearer’s beauty and importance, so, too, when the soul dons and utilizes these “garments”, its intellect and emotion find expression.
שהם מחשבה דבור ומעשה של תרי״ג מצות התורה
They (the garments) are: thought, speech and action as they find expression in the 613 commandments of the Torah.
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to explain how the divine soul expresses itself through these three garments.
שכשהאדם מקיים במעשה כל מצות מעשיות
For, when a person actively fulfills all the precepts which require physical action (e.g., when he dons the tefillin or fulfills the commandment of tzitzit, etc.),
ובדיבור הוא עוסק בפירוש כל תרי״ג מצות והלכותיהן
and with his power of speech he occupies himself in expounding all the 613 commandments and the laws governing their fulfillments,
i.e., the person’s speech is immersed in the study of Torah which includes the exposition of the commandments. For example, Tractate Berachot deals with the commandments and the laws of blessings; Tractate Shabbat deals with the commandments and laws of Shabbat observance, etc.,
ובמחשבה הוא משיג כל מה שאפשר לו להשיג בפרד״ס התורה
and with his power of thought he comprehends all that he is capable of understanding in the Pardes (i.e., the four levels) of Torah,
The word Pardes (פרדס), whose literal meaning is “orchard”, is here used as an acronym of the four Hebrew words, Pshat, Remez, Derush and Sod, meaning, respectively: plain sense, intimation, homiletical exposition and esoteric meaning — the four levels of Scriptural interpretation.
הרי כללות תרי״ג אברי נפשו מלובשים בתרי״ג מצות התורה
then all of his soul’s 613 “organs” are clothed in the 613 commandments of the Torah.
Just as the human body consists of 248 organs and 365 blood vessels, corresponding to the Torah’s 248 positive commandments and 365 prohibitive commandments (613 in all), the soul similarly comprises 613 “organs” — the spiritual counterpart of the 613 bodily organs — each “organ” corresponding to a specific commandment. When, through its three “garments” (thought, speech and action), the soul embraces all 613 commandments, then all 613 “organs” of the soul are enclothed in all 613 commandments — each “organ of the soul in its related commandment.
(Note the Alter Rebbe’s emphasis of the word “all” (“all the precepts which require physical action,” “in expounding all the 613 commandments,” “all that he is capable of understanding”). Should his “garments” fail to include all 613 commandments — were he to omit one specific commandment — then the corresponding “organ” of the soul will remain bereft of its mitzvah-“garment”.)
Thus we see, in a general sense, how fulfillment of all the commandments with one’s thought, speech and action, “clothes” the entire soul in all 613 commandments of the Torah. The Alter Rebbe now goes on to specify which components of the soul are “clothed by which particular garment.
---
Rambam - Daily Mitzvah - Sefer Hamitzvos:
N236
Negative Commandment 236
Borrowing with Interest
"You shall not give interest to your brother"—Deuteronomy 23:20.
One may not take a loan – whether money or any other item – from a fellow Jew if it involves payment of interest. Had the Torah not specified this prohibition, we'd have thought that the prohibition against loaning with interest lies only with the lender, but that the borrower does not transgress (similar to the prohibition against defrauding, where only the defrauder transgresses, not the defrauded).
In addition to this prohibition, the borrower also transgresses the prohibition against "placing a stumbling block in the path of a blind person."
Borrowing with Interest
Negative Commandment 236
Translated by Berel Bell
The 236th prohibition is that the borrower is also forbidden from borrowing with interest.
If not for this prohibition on the borrower to borrow with interest, one might think that only the lender transgresses, since he is the wrongdoer; not the borrower, since he merely allows himself to be overcharged. This would be similar to ona'a,1 which applies only to the one who overcharges, not the one who pays. It was therefore necessary to have a separate prohibition that the borrower shall not borrow money with interest.
The source of this prohibition is Gd's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not deduct interest from your brother, whether it is interest for money, interest for food,..."
The Oral Torah explains [that this phrase should be read,] "Do not allow to be deducted from your brother..." [therefore applying to the borrower, not the lender]. Our Sages stated explicitly in tractate Bava Metzia: "A borrower transgresses 'Do not deduct' and3 'Do not place a stumbling block before the blind,' " as explained in our discussion of that mitzvah.4
FOOTNOTES
1.  N250.
2.  Deut. 23:20.
3.  Lev. 19:14.
4.  N299.
---
Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day: Metamme'ey Mishkav uMoshav Chapter 4
Chapter 4
Halacha 1
There are four women who are impure only from the time they discover uterine bleeding onward. They do not impart impurity retroactively. They are: a woman who is pregnant, one who is nursing, a maiden, or one who is elderly.
What is meant by a pregnant woman? A woman whose pregnancy has become obvious. If she was considered as pregnant and then experienced uterine bleeding and discharged a sack full of air or an entity that is not considered as a fetus, her status continues without and she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward. If she experienced uterine bleeding and directly afterwards, her pregnancy became obvious, she becomes impure retroactively like other women.
What is meant by a woman who is nursing? A woman within 24 months of childbirth, even if her child died within this time, she weaned him, or gave him to a nursemaid, she is impure only from the time bleeding is discovered. After 24 months, even if she continues to nurse, she becomes impure retroactively like other women.
What is meant by the term "a maiden"? A girl who has never menstruated, i.e., the intent is a maiden with regard to menstruation and not a maiden with regard to hymeneal bleeding. What is implied? Even if she was married and experienced uterine bleeding because of marriage or she gave birth and experienced uterine bleeding because of birth, she is still considered as a maiden with regard to the ruling that she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward.
What is meant by the term "elderly woman"? A woman who did not menstruate for three months as she approached advanced age. When is she considered elderly? When she is called an old woman by others in her presence and she does not protest. If three 30-day intervals pass and then she menstruates, another three 30-day intervals or more or less pass, and she menstruates, she is considered like other women and imparts impurity retroactively.
Halacha 2
When a girl menstruates for the first time, even if her blood is flowing or dripping for all seven days, it is considered as if she experienced bleeding once. If she experienced bleeding, it stopped and then started again, it is considered as if she experienced bleeding twice.
Halacha 3
When a young girl who had not yet reached the age when she is expected to menstruate experiences uterine bleeding for the first and second times, she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward. If she experiences bleeding a third time, she imparts impurity retroactively. If three months then pass without her menstruating and then she menstruates, she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward. If three other months then pass without her menstruating and then she menstruates, she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward. If three other months then pass without her menstruating and then she menstruates, she is impure retroactively.
Halacha 4
When a young girl reaches the age when she can be expected to menstruate and experiences uterine bleeding for the first time, she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward. From the second occasion onward, she imparts impurity retroactively. If three months then pass without her menstruating and then she menstruates, she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward. If three other months then pass without her menstruating and then she menstruates, she is impure retroactively.
Halacha 5
If a pregnant woman, one who is nursing or elderly, or a girl who has never menstruated, but has reached the age when that is likely experiences uterine bleeding once, she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward. If such a woman experiences bleeding a second time, she imparts impurity retroactively like all other women, as explained. If, however, the first time she experienced bleeding, it came because of external factors, she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward, even if she experiences bleeding a second time.
Halacha 6
When a pregnant or nursing woman experienced uterine bleeding and then a three month interval passed before she experienced bleeding again, she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward. If another three months pass without her menstruating and then she experiences uterine bleeding again, i.e., a third experience of bleeding when counting the first, she imparts impurity retroactively.
When a woman experiences uterine bleeding within 24 hours of experiencing "the bleeding of purity," she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward.
Any woman about whom it is said, "she is impure only from the time she discovers uterine bleeding onward," must continuously inspect herself even though she imparts impurity retroactively. All women who inspect themselves frequently are praiseworthy, with the exception of a woman in the nidah state and a woman who is granted "the bleeding of purity," for whom the inspections are of no consequence whatsoever.
Halacha 7
The Sages ordained that Jewish women should inspect themselves every day in the morning because of the pure articles that they touched the previous evening and in the evening, because of the pure articles they touched in the morning. Whenever a woman partakes of terumah, she should inspect herself when she partakes of the terumah.
Every woman should inspect herself before she is intimate with her husband, because she also inspects herself for the sake of pure articles. If, however, she does not have to do with pure articles, she need not inspect herself for the sake of intimacy with her husband. For every woman who has a fixed time when she is expected to menstruate can operate on the presumption that at other times, she is pure with regard to relations with her husband, as we explained with regard to the laws of nidah.
Halacha 8
Jewish young girls who have not reached puberty may operate under the assumption that they are pure. It is not necessary that women inspect them. Once they reach puberty, they must undergo an inspection and they should be inspected by mature women.
Halacha 9
When a woman who is a deafmute, an intellectually or emotionally compromised woman, or one who lost control of her mental faculties due to sickness has an intellectually capable woman who cares for her, they may partake of terumah.
Halacha 10
Any garments stained with blood coming from Jewish homes are assumed to be impure. Those coming from gentile homes are considered to be pure. Those found in Jewish cities are considered to be pure. For Jews are not suspected of casting away their bloodstained garments. Instead, they are hidden away.
Accordingly, any bloodstained garments that are discovered are considered as pure with the exception of those in holes and around an impure room. In all instances, the impurity is only a decree, imposed because of doubt, as we explained.
Halacha 11
Whenever a bloodstained garment is found, it should be treated with seven detergent agents. Afterwards, whether or not the stain is purged, the garment is immersed in a mikveh and then is deemed pure.
The rationale is that if it is not purged at all, it was a tint. If it was purged or its color faded, it is assumed to be a bloodstain. Since it was treated with these seven detergents, the blood has already been nullified even though a trace of it is still apparent. Even when a stain definitely came from nidah bleeding, once it was treated with these seven detergent agents, the blood is considered as nullified. The garment may be immersed and then used in connection with ritually pure entities.
Halacha 12
When a bloodstain on a garment is no longer detectable, the entire garment should be treated with the seven detergent agents and then immersed.
The following laws apply when semen is no longer detectable on a garment: If it the garment was new, it should be checked with a needle. If the garment was worn, it should be inspected in the sun.
Halacha 13
The following laws apply when a garment that was stained was immersed in the mikveh and then brought into contact with ritually pure articles. If afterwards it was treated with the seven detergent agents and was not purged, it is a tint. The ritually pure articles with which it came into contact remain ritually pure and there is no need to immerse it again. If the stain was purged or faded, it is a bloodstain. The pure articles are impure, because the person was concerned with the stain as evidenced by his removal of it. The garment must be immersed a second time to purify it.
Halacha 14
When a stain was treated with six of the seven detergent agents and it was not purged and then it was treated with soap and it was purged, the pure articles with which it came into contact contract impurity. Although soap removes tints as well, since the garment was not treated with all seven detergent agents, it is presumed that it was a bloodstain and that, had the seventh agent been used, it would have been purged.
If one treated a stained garment with all seven detergent agents and the stain was not purged and then treated it with them again and it was purged, but a trace remained, all of the pure articles with which it came into contact between the first washing and the second washing are pure. All of the pure articles with which it came into contact after the second washing are impure. The rationale is that since he showed his intent that he objects to any trace of the stain and desires to remove all remnants of it, the garment is impure until all remnants are nullified and it is immersed in a mikveh.
In Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah, we already explained the seven detergent agents with which a stain is treated and how it is treated with them.
Halacha 15
When a woman dies and afterwards menstrual blood flows from her body, it imparts impurity to garments it stains. The rationale is that the uterus is an impure place. Hence, even though the blood flowed out after she died and the laws of nidah no longer apply, since it emerged from an impure place, it imparts nidah impurity to garments it stains. If it comprises a revi'it, it imparts impurity to everything under the same shelter and it imparts impurity to garments it stains.
---
Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day: Malveh veLoveh Chapter 19, Malveh veLoveh Chapter 20, Malveh veLoveh Chapter 21
Chapter 19
Halacha 1
When the court attaches the property of a borrower to expropriate it, they should expropriate only land of intermediate quality for a lender.
According to Scriptural Law, a creditor should receive only the property of inferior quality, as implied by Deuteronomy 24:11: "You shall stand outside and the person who owes you the money shall bring the security out to you." What is the tendency of a person to bring out? The least valuable of his utensils. Our Sages, however, ordained that a creditor could expropriate property of intermediate quality, so that people would not refuse to give loans.
When does the above apply? When the lender comes to collect from the borrower himself. If, however, the borrower dies, and the lender comes to collect from his heirs - whether they are below or above the age of majority -he may collect only property of inferior value.
Halacha 2
We do not collect payment from property that has been sold, when the debtor owns property that is still in his possession. [This applies even if the property in his possession is of inferior quality, and the property that has been sold is of intermediate or superior quality, and whether the property was sold or given away as presents.
If the property that has not been sold is flooded, the creditor may collect the property that has been sold. The rationale is that since it has been devastated, it is as if it no longer exists.
Halacha 3
The creditor is given the upper hand in the following situation. Reuven sold all his fields to Shimon, and Shimon sold one of his fields to Levi. If one of Reuven's creditors comes to expropriate property in payment for his debt, he may expropriate property from either Shimon or Levi.
When does the above apply? When Levi purchased property of intermediate value. If, however, he purchased property that was of superior or inferior value, the creditor cannot expropriate property from Levi. For Levi will tell him: "I purposely took the trouble of purchasing a field that you have no right to expropriate, so that you would not have a claim against me." Similarly, if Levi purchased a field of intermediate worth and left Shimon a field of intermediate worth similar to the one of intermediate worth that he expropriated, the creditor cannot expropriate the field from Levi, for he will tell the creditor: "I left you property to expropriate as payment for your debt."
Halacha 4
We have already explained that payment for damages should be expropriated from property of superior value, a lender should expropriate property of intermediate value, and the money due a woman by virtue of her ketubah should be expropriated from property of inferior value.
When a person owns only property of superior value and property of inferior value, damages should be expropriated from the property of superior value, and a lender and a woman collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah should expropriate the property of inferior value.
If he owns only property of superior value and property of intermediate value, damages should be expropriated from the property of superior value, and a lender and a woman collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah should expropriate the property of intermediate value.
If he owns only property of inferior value and property of intermediate value, damages and payment for a loan should be expropriated from the property of intermediate value, and a woman collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah should expropriate the property of inferior value.
Halacha 5
When a person owns three fields and he sells them to three people at the same time, they all take the place of the previous owner. Thus, payment for damages should be expropriated from property of superior value, a lender should expropriate property of intermediate value and the money due a woman by virtue of her ketubah should be expropriated from property of inferior value.
If he sold them one after the other, they should all expropriate their due from the last purchaser. If the worth of that property was not sufficient, they should expropriate from the property purchased before it. If the worth of that property was also not sufficient, they should expropriate from the property purchased first.
This applies even if the last purchaser acquired the property of inferior quality. For the purchaser who preceded him can tell the person who seeks to expropriate property: "I left you property from which you could collect your debt."
Halacha 6
When a debtor sells all of his properties to one person, one after the other, that person takes the place of the original owner.
When does the above apply? When he purchased the property of superior quality last. When, however, he purchased the property of inferior quality last, all the creditors must collect their due from that property. For when a person comes to expropriate property, the purchaser will tell him: "I left you property from which you can collect your debt."
Why does the purchaser not tell this to a person who seeks to expropriate the property when he purchased the property of superior value first, and thus a woman collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and a lender would also expropriate their due from the property of superior value? Because this possibility is an ordinance instituted for the sake of the purchaser. And he will tell them: "I cannot accept this ordinance." Instead, each type of creditor will collect from the property fit for him.
Halacha 7
Similarly, the following laws apply when the debtor sold all his properties to one person, one after the other, selling him the property of superior value last, and that purchaser sold the property of inferior and intermediate value to a third party and retained the property of superior value for himself. All the debtors collect their due from the property of superior value, for the purchaser does not have any property from the original debtor to divert them to.
When the purchaser sold the property of superior value and retained the properties of inferior and intermediate value, payment for damages should be expropriated from property of superior value in the possession of the second purchaser. The debt owed a lender and the money due a woman by virtue of her ketubah should be expropriated from the property of intermediate and inferior value that the first purchaser retained.
Halacha 8
As reflected in the following situation, when a person limits his power to expropriate property, his waiver may extend beyond his original intent: One person borrowed money from a colleague. Afterwards, the borrower sold his property to two people each person purchasing a portion for himself, one after the other. The creditor wrote to the second purchaser, pledging that he would not expropriate the property as payment for the debt and affirmed his commitment with a kinyan. Our Sages ruled that he is also not able to expropriate the property sold to the first purchaser. For that purchaser will say to the creditor: "I left you the opportunity of collecting the money owed you from the debtor by expropriating the property that the second purchaser bought after I did. You caused yourself a loss by removing your lien on it."
Similar laws apply with regard to a woman who seeks to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. If she writes such a waiver to the second purchaser, she loses the right to the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and cannot expropriate property. If, however, such persons write such a waiver to the first purchaser, they may expropriate the property from the second purchaser.
The following situation can occur when a borrower sells a field to a purchaser and then the purchaser sells it to a second purchaser. The lender writes to the first purchaser, pledging that he would not expropriate the property as payment for the debt and affirms his commitment with a kinyan. The creditor may expropriate the property from the second purchaser. The first purchaser may expropriate the property from the creditor, because he pledged that he would not expropriate the property, and he did. The second purchaser can then expropriate the property from the first purchaser, because he sold it to him. The creditor may then expropriate the property again from the second purchaser, and the cycle continues until they arrange a compromise.
Similar laws apply with regard to a woman who seeks to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and makes a pledge to the person who purchased her husband's property.
Chapter 20
Halacha 1
When a person owes many debts, the person whose debt was made first has the right to expropriate property first - from the borrower himself and from his creditors. If a later creditor expropriated property before the first creditor, the first creditor may expropriate it from him. For the person whose debt was established first acquires the property.
To what does the above apply? To landed property that the borrower possessed at the time that he took the loan. When, however, he purchased landed property after borrowing from many creditors, no one is granted precedence over the others, even if the borrower wrote to each one in the promissory note: "The property that I will purchase in the future is on lien to you." Instead, all are equal, and whoever comes first and expropriates the property acquires it, even if he was the last to make the loan.
Halacha 2
When a borrower writes in the promissory note: "What I will acquire in the future is on lien to you," afterwards purchases a field and then borrows from another person, the field is on lien to the first lender. He has the right to expropriate it first. Similar principles apply even if there are 100 creditors.
There is no concept of precedence with regard to the expropriation of movable property. Instead, whoever comes first and expropriates it acquires it, even if he was the last to make the loan.
If another person came and seized possession of movable property belonging to this debtor in order to acquire the property on behalf of one of the creditors, that person does not acquire the property. The rationale is that a person who seizes property on behalf of a creditor in a situation where a loss is caused to another person does not acquire it. If, however, seizing it would not cause a loss to other people, he does acquire it for him. Similarly, if the borrower tells him: "Acquire this article on behalf of so-and-so," he acquires it for him. None of the other creditors can expropriate this movable property, because another person has already acquired it.
Halacha 3
When promissory notes are all dated on the same date - or at the same hour, in a place where the hours are mentioned - whichever creditor comes first and expropriates property, whether landed property or movable property, acquires it.
Halacha 4
The ensuing laws apply when creditors whose promissory notes are dated on the same date all come to expropriate property together, or when creditors whose promissory notes were dated before one another come to expropriate movable property, for there is no concept of precedence with regard to movable property, or creditors come to expropriate property that the borrower purchased after taking the loan dated last, and the property the borrower possesses is not sufficient to enable each one to collect the debt that is owed to them.
How is the property divided? If when the property is divided in equal portions according to the number of creditors, the person owed the least will receive the amount owed him or less, the property is divided into that number of equal portions.
If dividing the property into equal portions would give the person owed the least more than he is owed, this is what should be done: We divide the sum equally among the creditors so that the person owed the least will receive the money that he is owed. He then withdraws. The remaining creditors then divide the balance of the debtor's resources in the following manner.
What is implied? A person owed three debts: one of a maneh, one for 200 and one for 300. If all the resources of the debtor total 300 zuz, they are divided 100 for each. Similarly, if his resources are less than 300, they should be divided equally among the three.
If his resources total more than 300 zuz, the 300 should be divided equally and then the person owed 100 should withdraw. The remaining money should be divided equally in this same manner.
What is implied? If the debtor's resources total 500 or less, the 300 should be divided equally, and then the person owed 100 should withdraw. The balance of 200 or less should then be divided equally among the remaining creditors, and then the second one withdraws.
If the debtor's resources total 600, the 300 should be divided equally, and then the person owed 100 should withdraw. They then divide 200 between the two equally, and then the second one withdraws. The 100 that remain should then be given to the person owed 300; he thus receives only 300. The debtor's resources should be divided according to this pattern even if there are 100 creditors, if they come to divide the resources at the same time. There are, however, Geonim who rule that the resources should be divided in proportion to the amount owed each creditor.
Halacha 5
The fact that a promissory note is not dated correctly creates difficulties for its bearer. For example, Reuven and Shimon each possess a promissory note, stating that Levi owes them money. The promissory note possessed by Reuven is dated Nissan 5, and that possessed by Shimon is dated Nissan, without specifying a day. Levi possesses only one field that is not equal in value to the debts owed them both. Reuven is allowed to take possession of the field, for perhaps the promissory note owed Shimon was signed at the end of Nissan.
Similarly, Shimon cannot expropriate a field that was sold by Levi from lyyar or afterwards. For the purchaser will tell him: "Perhaps the date of your promissory note is the first of Nissan. There is a field that was not sold at that time in the possession of Reuven. Expropriate it and then let Reuven, whose promissory note is dated after yours, come and expropriate the field from me." Therefore, if Reuven and Shimon write each other a document granting power of attorney, they may expropriate a field that was sold after lyyar using both vantage points.
Similar laws apply if Levi sold one field twice, composing separate deeds of sale for Reuven and for Shimon, with one dated on the first of Nissan and one Nissan, without specifying a day.
Chapter 21
Halacha 1
When a creditor expropriates a field, he may also expropriate the increase in value that the purchaser brings about within the field. This applies whether the field increases in value because of an investment, or it increases in value as a matter of course.
There is, however, a difference between the two instances. If it increases in value as a matter of course, the creditor may expropriate the entire increase in value. If it increased in value because of an investment, the creditor may expropriate only half the increase.
What is implied? Reuven was owed a debt of 200 zuz by Shimon. Shimon sold a field to Levi for a maneh. Levi made an investment in the field and caused its value to increase and it is now worth 200. When Reuven expropriates it from Levi, he expropriates it from him for 100 and also the 50 that constitutes half the increase of value. If it increased in value on its own accord - e.g., the price rose or trees grew - he can expropriate the entire amount.
Great sages issued a ruling stating that a purchaser should not have lesser legal power than a person who occupies a field belonging to a colleague without permission, in which instance the increase in the field's value is appraised, and the squatter is given the weaker position. Therefore, if the field increased 100 zuz in value and Levi spent 50, Levi should receive all of his expenses and half of the increase in value beyond the expenses. The other half of the increase in value, and the principal, should be expropriated by the creditor. These are words of logic, and it is appropriate to rule accordingly. The purchaser then returns and expropriates the principal from Shimon's property, including even property that he sold or gave away after the time he sold this field to Levi. The increase in value that the creditor expropriated from Levi, the purchaser - whether half the increase in value or the entire increase - Levi may then expropriate only from property in the possession of Shimon. For it is an enactment instituted for the sake of society not to expropriate a property's increase in value, nor produce eaten by a thief, nor the sustenance given a widow and the deceased's daughters from property that has been sold. The rationale is that these are matters that have no limit. And it is one of the leniencies associated with a ketubah that a woman is not granted the opportunity of expropriating the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from a property's increase in value.
Why is a creditor able to expropriate only half the increase of value that comes after the investment was made? Because the increase in value comes after Shimon, the original owner borrowed money from Reuven and sold the property to Levi. Thus, Reuven and Levi can be considered to be two creditors of Shimon's and the increase in the value of the field as an increase in the value of his property that came after he borrowed from both of them. In such an instance, they divide the increase equally, as we have explained. Accordingly, the following rules apply in the ensuing circumstance. Reuven borrowed a maneh from Shimon, and in the promissory note wrote that he is extending the lien to: "the property that I will acquire in the future." He then borrowed 200 zuz from Levi, and in the promissory note wrote that he is extending the lien to: "the property that I will acquire in the future." He then purchased a field and sold it to Yehudah for 150 zuz. Yehudah made an investment and caused its value to increase, and ultimately it was worth 300 zuz. Shimon and Levi expropriate the principal and divide it equally. Thus, each receives 75 zuz.
The three - Shimon, Levi and Yehudah - then divide the 150 zuz of the field's increase in value according to the principles that we explained. Thus, Shimon expropriates the complete payment of the maneh owed him from this field. Levi expropriates 137 1/2, and Yehudah receives 62 1/2 from the field's increase in value. They should divide the increase in value in this manner. These principles apply even if there are 100 creditors.
Halacha 2
All of the produce that the purchaser consumed, however, is not expropriated from him. The produce that is attached to the land, by contrast, including even the produce that no longer needs the nurture of the land - e.g., grapes that are ready to be harvested - may be expropriated by a creditor in the same way as he expropriates the property's increase in value.
Halacha 3
When the recipient of a present invests in it and causes its value to increase, the creditor may not expropriate any of its increase in value. Instead, we evaluate its worth at the time the present was given and allow him to expropriate that amount. If, however, it increases in value as a matter of course, the creditor may expropriate the entire field. If the person giving the present accepts responsibility for it, the creditor may expropriate the increase in value from this field just as he would if it were in the possession of a purchaser.
Why is a creditor given the right to expropriate half of a property's increase in value from a purchaser, but not from a person who receives a present? Because the seller of the property wrote to the purchaser in the deed of sale: "I am obligated to you for the principal, the labor you invest in it, and the increase in value that you will bring to it. I take responsibility for everything." The purchaser accepted this stipulation. For the purchaser took possession of the field on the condition that if the increase in the value of the field was expropriated from him, he would seek recompense from the seller. Even if this stipulation was not written in the deed of sale, it is a matter of public knowledge that this is the law governing the seller's responsibility to the purchaser. With regard to a present, by contrast, this stipulation does not apply. Hence, a creditor may not expropriate any increase in value that the recipient of a present brought about through investment.
Halacha 4
Similarly, if orphans who inherit an estate increase its value, a creditor of their father may not expropriate any of its increase in value. If, however, the property increases in value as a matter of course, he may expropriate the entire increase.
5. The following laws apply when a creditor expropriates property for a debt owed him from a purchaser from the principal and half of the increase in the property's value. We then consider what remains of the landed property. If the land that remains would be of value to the purchaser - e.g., in a field, an area where nine kabbin of grain could be sown, in a garden, an area where half a kab of vegetables could be sown - the creditor and the purchaser should become partners with regard to the land. If the property is not large enough to be divided in a manner that the smaller portion of sufficient size would be referred to as a field or as a garden, the creditor should reimburse the purchaser financially for the increase in the value of the field, as is due him.
Halacha 6
The following rules apply when a field was designated as an ipotiki. The creditor may expropriate the entire field. We consider the half of the field's increase in value which must be repaid to the purchaser. If half of the increase in value exceeds the purchaser's investment, he should collect the amount he invested from the creditor. He is given only this amount, because the creditor can tell him: "It is my field that increased in value." He should collect the remainder of the money due him from the field's increase in value from the seller.
If half of the field's increase in value is less than the purchaser's investment, the purchaser should be reimbursed by the person who expropriated the field for only half of the field's increase in value. He then collects from the seller the other half of the field's increase in value.
Halacha 7
When a creditor comes to expropriate property from heirs, and the heirs claim: "We caused the value of the property to increase," but the creditor claims: "Perhaps it was your father who caused the property to increase in value," the burden of proof is on the heirs.
If the heirs bring proof that they increased the value of the property, we evaluate the increase and their expenses. They receive the lesser of the two, and they are given this amount in money.
When does the above apply? When the field was designated an ipotiki. If, however, it was not designated an ipotiki, if the heirs desire, they have the right to pay the creditor the debt he is owed and absolve his claim. Or if they desire, they may take a share of the land that is equivalent to the value of the increase they brought to the value of the property.
---
Hayom Yom
Tuesday  Kislev 29, Fifth Day of Chanuka    5703
Torah lessons:   Chumash: Mikeitz, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 140-150.
Tanya: Ch. 4. In addition (p. 13)...(that he violates). (p. 13).
The sins of Israel in the time of the Greeks were: Fraternizing with the Greeks, studying their culture, profaning Shabbat and Holy Days, eating t'reifa and neglecting Jewish tahara.1 The punishment-tribulation was the spiritual destruction2 of the Sanctuary, death, and slavery in exile. Through teshuva3 and mesirat nefesh,4 that great, miraculous Divine salvation - the miracle of Chanuka - came about.
FOOTNOTES
1.  Purity. The term "family purity" (for taharat hamishpacha) describes Torah laws concerning marriage, particularly mikva, and all observances related to family sanctity. See Sh'vat 21; Nissan 10.
2.  The defilement of the Sanctuary, its altar, and the famous cruses of oil. The physical destruction centuries later was by the Romans.
3.  "Return," or "repentance," a frequent theme in Torah and Chassidus. See for example Tishrei 3 to 8.
4.  Total devotion, to the point of martyrdom.
---
Daily Thought:
Beyond Faith & Intellect
Intellect is inadequate because not all things can be explained. Intellect needs faith.
Faith is impotent because it remains forever obscure. Faith needs intellect.
But they are opposites, as contradictory as being and not being: Faith accepts; Intellect questions. Faith surrenders; Intellect struggles.
Miraculously, there is a power that can join them in harmony, and it is called wisdom: The capacity to see the truth as it is and the quietness to allow it entry without loss.

-------

No comments:

Post a Comment